273 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23009074)
41. Corvis ST Tonometer for Measuring Postoperative IOP in LASIK Patients.
Hong J; Yu Z; Jiang C; Zhou X; Liu Z; Sun X; Xu J
Optom Vis Sci; 2015 May; 92(5):589-95. PubMed ID: 25871871
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Comparison of Goldmann and ORA tonometers in newly diagnosed, untreated, POAG and OHT eyes.
Sánchez-Barahona C; Bolívar G; Teus MA
Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol (Engl Ed); 2023 Sep; 98(9):528-532. PubMed ID: 37595792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. [Methods of measuring intraocular pressure independently of central corneal thickness].
Hager A; Wiegand W
Ophthalmologe; 2008 Sep; 105(9):840-4. PubMed ID: 18438633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Relationship between corneal biomechanical properties and structural biomarkers in patients with normal-tension glaucoma: a retrospective study.
Park K; Shin J; Lee J
BMC Ophthalmol; 2018 Jan; 18(1):7. PubMed ID: 29334923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Corneal biomechanical properties and intraocular pressure measurement in patients with nanophthalmos.
Altan C; Kara N; Baz O; Satana B; Demirok A; Yilmaz OF
Br J Ophthalmol; 2012 Jun; 96(6):806-10. PubMed ID: 22399691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Effectiveness of the Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, the Dynamic Contour Tonometer, the Ocular Response Analyzer and the Corvis ST in Measuring Intraocular Pressure following FS-LASIK.
Bao F; Huang W; Zhu R; Lu N; Wang Y; Li H; Wu S; Lin H; Wang J; Zheng X; Huang J; Li Y; Wang Q; Elsheikh A
Curr Eye Res; 2020 Feb; 45(2):144-152. PubMed ID: 31869261
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
47. Clinical Evaluation of Methods to Correct Intraocular Pressure Measurements by the Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, Ocular Response Analyzer, and Corvis ST Tonometer for the Effects of Corneal Stiffness Parameters.
Bao F; Huang Z; Huang J; Wang J; Deng M; Li L; Yu A; Wang Q; Elsheikh A
J Glaucoma; 2016 Jun; 25(6):510-9. PubMed ID: 26709500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Corneal hysteresis and intraocular pressure measurement in children using the reichert ocular response analyzer.
Kirwan C; O'Keefe M; Lanigan B
Am J Ophthalmol; 2006 Dec; 142(6):990-2. PubMed ID: 17157583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. A comparison of intraocular pressure values obtained using a Goldmann applanation tonometer and a handheld version of applanation resonance tonometer: A preliminary report.
Mulak M; Czak WA; Mimier M; Kaczmarek R
Adv Clin Exp Med; 2018 Apr; 27(4):481-485. PubMed ID: 29558028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Corneal biomechanical characteristics measured by the CorVis Scheimpflug technology in eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma and normal eyes.
Tian L; Wang D; Wu Y; Meng X; Chen B; Ge M; Huang Y
Acta Ophthalmol; 2016 Aug; 94(5):e317-24. PubMed ID: 25639340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Goldmann Applanation Tonometer Versus Ocular Response Analyzer for Measuring Intraocular Pressure After Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty.
Feizi S; Faramarzi A; Masoudi A; Azari AA; Veisi A
Cornea; 2018 Nov; 37(11):1370-1375. PubMed ID: 29877927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. The Influence of Corneal Biomechanical Properties on Intraocular Pressure Measurements Using a Rebound Self-tonometer.
Brown L; Foulsham W; Pronin S; Tatham AJ
J Glaucoma; 2018 Jun; 27(6):511-518. PubMed ID: 29557828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Intraocular pressure and ocular pulse amplitude comparisons in different types of glaucoma using dynamic contour tonometry.
Punjabi OS; Ho HK; Kniestedt C; Bostrom AG; Stamper RL; Lin SC
Curr Eye Res; 2006 Oct; 31(10):851-62. PubMed ID: 17050277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in healthy and glaucomatous eyes.
Ceruti P; Morbio R; Marraffa M; Marchini G
Eye (Lond); 2009 Feb; 23(2):262-9. PubMed ID: 18219335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Effect of central corneal thickness on dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry in primary open-angle glaucoma.
Grieshaber MC; Schoetzau A; Zawinka C; Flammer J; Orgul S
Arch Ophthalmol; 2007 Jun; 125(6):740-4. PubMed ID: 17562982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Comparison of intraocular pressure measured by ocular response analyzer and Goldmann applanation tonometer after corneal refractive surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zhang H; Sun Z; Li L; Sun R; Zhang H
BMC Ophthalmol; 2020 Jan; 20(1):23. PubMed ID: 31924174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Comparison of corneal biomechanical properties in normal tension glaucoma patients with different visual field progression speed.
Hong Y; Shoji N; Morita T; Hirasawa K; Matsumura K; Kasahara M; Shimizu K
Int J Ophthalmol; 2016; 9(7):973-8. PubMed ID: 27500103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Corneal biomechanical properties in normal-tension glaucoma.
Morita T; Shoji N; Kamiya K; Fujimura F; Shimizu K
Acta Ophthalmol; 2012 Feb; 90(1):e48-53. PubMed ID: 21914145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Goldmann applanation tonometry versus ocular response analyzer for intraocular pressure measurements in keratoconic eyes.
Goldich Y; Barkana Y; Avni I; Zadok D
Cornea; 2010 Sep; 29(9):1011-5. PubMed ID: 20539214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Impact of dehydration and fasting on intraocular pressure and corneal biomechanics measured by the Ocular Response Analyzer.
Uysal BS; Duru N; Ozen U; Arikan Yorgun M; Akcay E; Caglayan M; Cagil N
Int Ophthalmol; 2018 Apr; 38(2):451-457. PubMed ID: 28255839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
